On 6/29/07, Bruce Trevarthen (B2 Limited) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > SOFTWARE: > Again you're correct, each VM is just as if it were a physical server in the > eye's of software licenses, even Microsoft still expect a Processor license > per Virtual Server even though it's only one physical CPU underneath it all.
I think that's incorrect. Wasn't there some news article stating the low end versions of Vista have a virtualisation restriction in their license that was going to be lifted whereas XP Home can be? If you had to buy a license for very virtual machine, OS manufacturers would have lost a lot of business. Chris -- Chris Velevitch Manager - Sydney Flash Platform Developers Group m: 0415 469 095 www.flashdev.org.au --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cfaussie" group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
